Misplaced Pages

User talk:Badagnani: Difference between revisions

Article snapshot taken from[REDACTED] with creative commons attribution-sharealike license. Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat. We can research this topic together.
Browse history interactively← Previous editNext edit →Content deleted Content addedVisualWikitext
Revision as of 04:23, 26 March 2009 editGrayshi (talk | contribs)Pending changes reviewers, Rollbackers8,488 editsm →Your reverts on this talk page: new section← Previous edit Revision as of 04:24, 26 March 2009 edit undoBadagnani (talk | contribs)136,593 edits Do not post here again.Next edit →
Line 104: Line 104:


Do you agree to work my way, yes or no? If no, then don't me for anymore help. I work one way. -]<sup>(])</sup> 02:41, 26 March 2009 (UTC) Do you agree to work my way, yes or no? If no, then don't me for anymore help. I work one way. -]<sup>(])</sup> 02:41, 26 March 2009 (UTC)

== Your reverts on this talk page ==

This:

Why do you feel the need to restore a blatant attack against all three of us? Just because it portrays you in a good light does not necessarily mean it's fine to leave such a rude and uncivil comment up there. ''''']'''''<sup>]</sup> 04:23, 26 March 2009 (UTC)

Revision as of 04:24, 26 March 2009

Archived talk

Replied at my page

I replied to your post at my talk page, in order to keep the discussion in one place. Cheers. -GTBacchus 15:58, 23 March 2009 (UTC)

Hi. Badagnani, I've noticed your name popping up in places such as WP:AN and other noticeboards, and I think I'm noticing a disturbing pattern. Do you realize that this comment, for example, is extremely likely to worsen a dispute, rather than improve it? Surely this isn't your goal - we wish to resole disputes, not to prolong them.

I do believe that you will have a better time at Misplaced Pages if you take a different approach. I hope my posting this here doesn't bother you. I just think you'd be happier editing here if you do it in a manner that generates less heat. -GTBacchus 21:22, 23 March 2009 (UTC)

A friendly reminder

I think it would be very helpful to review WP:BATTLE, especially, "Misplaced Pages is a volunteer community, and does not require its users to give any more time and effort than they wish. Focus on improving the encyclopedia itself, rather than demanding more from other users."

Many editors, myself included, will often make substantial changes to article without discussion, based upon the application of specific policies or guidelines. There is absolutely nothing wrong with this. --Ronz (talk) 18:16, 23 March 2009 (UTC)

I am tempted to remove this inappropriate comment that comes off as a snide personal attack a preachy and demeaning attack. ChildofMidnight (talk) 18:29, 23 March 2009 (UTC)
Substantial changes are often made to individual articles without much or any comment (such as reversion of vandalism or improvement of grammar), but when other long-time editors, in particular instances, request that deliberate and careful discussion be engaged in, engaging in such deliberate and careful discussion prior to large deletions does become the reasonable and right thing to do. Badagnani (talk) 19:26, 23 March 2009 (UTC)

Yet you do not participate in these so called "discussions". It's only when someone files a dispute or mediation that you respond. Most editors simply do not care about any bold editing done on articles such as Foam take-out container and List of * Americans, which obviously need some work done on them. I am strongly questioning your overall behavior on Misplaced Pages. Eugene2x► 22:30, 23 March 2009 (UTC)

Re: Your question at WP:UAA

I suggest WP:AN/I or contacting the two admins who requested the user have a clickable signature directly on their talk pages. KuyaBriBri 19:24, 23 March 2009 (UTC)

RFC/USER discussion concerning you (Badagnani)

Hello, Badagnani. Please be aware that a request for comments has been filed concerning your conduct on Misplaced Pages. The RFC entry can be found by your name in this list, and the actual discussion can be found at ], where you may want to participate. Eugene2x► 00:04, 24 March 2009 (UTC)

Essay

I would like you to read WP:DRNC, WP:BOLD, and WP:BRD. You should not compel editors to discuss whenever every single bit of information is removed. It disrupts the experience here and is the main cause for the edit warring issues lately. Eugene2x► 03:42, 24 March 2009 (UTC)

If you think I am wikihounding you, then so be it, I will try to stop the edits you claim are against WP:STALK. I do not want to cause irritation or any harm, even if we are opponents. Eugene2x► 03:59, 24 March 2009 (UTC)

Thank you for this. Going along with this, kindly do me the courtesy of undoing the edits of mine you followed me around to nearly a dozen articles reverting, and pledge to, in the future, discuss large deletions with care, seriousness, and collegiality prior to implementing such deletions, when requested to do so with sincerity by long-time editors. Badagnani (talk) 04:02, 24 March 2009 (UTC)

My statement did not necessarily mean that I would revert the edits (which were perfectly reasonable). It would also be a much, much better place for all of us if you stick to the WP:BRD essay and WP:DRNC. Frankly, just because you have the ability to undo someone's edits does not mean you can defend the edits with statements such as "use Discusssion."

Tibetan goji

Re this edit: the text is preserved at the Talk page for possible repair. It's clear WP:SYNTH - a collation of material to advance an argument, not collated previously - and no-one is obliged to discuss in advance the removal of material in breach of WP:NOR. Gordonofcartoon (talk) 03:45, 24 March 2009 (UTC)

Re:Chaunk

फोडणी is the way we (Marathis) write Phodani. You can also use google search to verify this. Also check Marathi[REDACTED] article mr:फोडणी. - कोल्हापुरी (talk) 07:10, 25 March 2009 (UTC)

That may be because they are not proficient in typing Marathi font ड़ is never used in Marathi, we use ड. And a lot of Marathi people are confused between "नी" and "णी". I know I am correct but I understand your dilemma. Google is your friend. Search old and new term to find which one is correct. - कोल्हापुरी (talk) 07:17, 25 March 2009 (UTC)
णी and नी problem is inherent to Marathi literate and illiterate folks irrespective of Hindi influence. In this particular case though I feel the previous writer didn't know how to type "णी". - कोल्हापुरी (talk) 07:25, 25 March 2009 (UTC)
फोलनी - I never heard of that, at least it is not used in south-west Maharashtra. Not sure of the etymology either but verb - फोड means "to break open". —Preceding unsigned comment added by कोल्हापुरी (talk • contribs) 08:11, 25 March 2009 (UTC)

Bánh chuối

Thanks for starting this article. Is there a holiday at the end of January that this food item would be part of? As I recall it's not a regular item, but the store owner said it was part of a holiday celebration. Chinese New Years even though it's Vietnamese? ChildofMidnight (talk) 20:38, 25 March 2009 (UTC)

Cool. Thanks for the info. I kind of wanted to try it although it wasn't cheap, but I got the sense from teh store owner that he didn't want me to buy it so his Vietnamese customers could have it as part of their holiday celebration. Fun stuff. I was back last weekend and got some good stuff. I still have to take some photos of the goodies... Cheers. Thanks for your help. ChildofMidnight (talk) 20:50, 25 March 2009 (UTC)

I think this may be Tan O (with all sorts of accents). Does that ring a bell? Also, is Can Tau (celery) different from our celery or same thing. I haven't looked yet to see what's on Misplaced Pages for that one yet... I also have a photo of Hung lui, so I have to see what's there for that. Sorry, too many things going on at once. :) ChildofMidnight (talk) 21:02, 25 March 2009 (UTC)

If it's tàu, that is an adjective meaning "Chinese" (literally "boat," as the Chinese used to be referred to as "boat people." Whenever you see tàu as a modifier after a word, you'll know what that means. In this case, though, it's cần tây, with tây meaning "Western" (i.e., European). Badagnani (talk) 21:07, 25 March 2009 (UTC)

So Can is celery? I think they sell regular celery too... Am I missing something? It looks pretty similar but the stalks are more slender or maybe just harvested younger. ChildofMidnight (talk) 21:12, 25 March 2009 (UTC)

See .
Húng lủi is either water mint (Mentha aquatica) or spearmint. Badagnani (talk) 21:12, 25 March 2009 (UTC)
Tần ô is Garland chrysanthemum. Badagnani (talk) 21:16, 25 March 2009 (UTC)

List of liqueurs, then?

I'll see you there. One article at a time, one edit at a time. First important lesson - be the first to use the talk page. -GTBacchus 21:41, 25 March 2009 (UTC)

Actually, let me put that more clearly. If you're reverted, don't revert back. It's very bad form. Go straight to the talk page, and start a section asking why the revert was made. Explain your reasons for the edit. Keep anything personal out of it - it's a dry content question. This is the stepping stone from which you can later make more powerful edits. -GTBacchus 21:44, 25 March 2009 (UTC)
Please, trust me on this. Let me help you, ok? You have to do that the way I'm telling you. -GTBacchus 21:51, 25 March 2009 (UTC)
There is a right way to get behavior policies enforced, and there is a wrong way. Reporting people, as if to the police, is a very wrong way. I didn't make that fact true, but it's true. If you do that, you'll end up turning more and more Wikipedians against you. There's a better way. -GTBacchus 22:10, 25 March 2009 (UTC)

This is a practical recommendation. If one editor is pursuing you to multiple articles, then the most powerful way to defeat them is to stop moving, and deal with them on one article. If you can do this in the right way, they won't follow you anymore. Think about it. -GTBacchus 22:11, 25 March 2009 (UTC)

  • I respectfully disagree with this advice. If someone is stalking you please get an impartial admin to intervene. There are clear policies on stalking that need to be respected. Baiting and disruption are an unfortunate part of editing on Misplaced Pages, and those who engage in these actions should be discouraged form doing so by third parties. Since the trolls are trying to get a reaction out of the editor targeted, that person's doing so just feeds them. Take care. Thanks for you help and collaboration. ChildofMidnight (talk) 23:11, 25 March 2009 (UTC)
    • Impartial admin? Cool, go get one. I'm trying to help Badagnani, but he won't provide me with the information I need to do it. How can I make a rational, well-informed decision in a Wikihounding case if the editor appealing to me won't give me details about the edits involved? How can I say that these link removals are wrongful, if I can't argue about the consensus support that the links enjoy? Maybe you can convey this to Badagnani, and persuade him to share the information I need. Good luck. -GTBacchus 23:16, 25 March 2009 (UTC)
Is the history tab at the top of your page broken? Have you tried using the "contributions" history? If you need guidance on how these functions work please let me know. It appears to me based on your sarcasm and attitude, as well as the bad advice you've offered, that you are part of the problem and not part of the solution. ChildofMidnight (talk) 02:37, 26 March 2009 (UTC)

External links

It appears, Badagnani, that you want to change the way Misplaced Pages handles external links. Is that accurate? I'm not agreeing or disagreeing with you - just asking. -GTBacchus 22:42, 25 March 2009 (UTC)

What do you want me to do?

What do you want me to do, make people agree to use the picture you found? Do you think there's a way around persuading them? -GTBacchus 01:53, 26 March 2009 (UTC)

You haven't cooperated with my attempt to help you. I asked you how we could demonstrate consensus for your links at List of liqueurs, and you wouldn't say anything about it. I asked, how can we demonstrate that your version is the one supported by consensus. I would ask that again about the ice cream picture. Most of the comments on the talk page don't support it. Do you think it is supported by a consensus? -GTBacchus 01:56, 26 March 2009 (UTC)
That's what it looks like, but there really isn't a clear consensus for removal, just several editors coming over from the RFC edit warring about it, so it is really 3-3 to remove, and with no clear consensus to remove the image should stay. But more importantly, regardless of Badagnani's arguments, whether he's wrong or right, he is being hounded by at least three editors from the RFC, all of whom hold serious grudges against Badagnani from past and recent disputes. When I pointed this out to them, they tried to follow my contributions as well, proving my point. This is like dealing with a wild pack of juvenile wolves, and I'm surprised that Misplaced Pages tolerates this egregious behavior from any editor. Obviously, Badagnani has eroded some of his good faith due to his inability to deal with problems he has both created and contributed to in the past, but no matter the blame, a community is judged by how it treats its accused, and those who have little defense. My guess is that the editors (all of whom happen to be non-admins) doing this to Badagnani have the ok from several administrators. Basically it makes Misplaced Pages look pretty bad when the so-called authorities condone this kind of bad behavior. The RFC should be deleted and the editors admonished. And Badagnani needs to have a mentor so he doesn't keep getting into these types of situations. Viriditas (talk) 02:27, 26 March 2009 (UTC)
I don't know so much about the ice-cream headache image. I know that the links at List of liqueurs were inline links to commercial sites for non-notable products, and that sort of link had better have a very good reason for being in an article, despite our linking policies. The hounding I know about, and it's unfortunate. I'm talked with at least one of the editors involved, and I've been encouraging him to engage on a more constructive level.

At the same time, Badagnani has been responding to it badly. I'm trying to coach him to learn a less combative approach, but he's showing a lot of resistance to working with me. I think he really wants me to yell at someone, but that really isn't how I work. I can only teach him to empower himself, but he has to trust me a little bit. I don't know if it'll work. -GTBacchus 02:40, 26 March 2009 (UTC)

Do you think that you get to make whatever you want, without having to use reasons to convince other people that your edits are good? If people don't agree to use your links, then we don't use them. You have to either go along with consensus, or do what it takes to change consensus. Yelling at people for hounding you will never have that effect. Think about it. -GTBacchus 02:01, 26 March 2009 (UTC)

Do you agree?

Do you agree to work my way, yes or no? If no, then don't me for anymore help. I work one way. -GTBacchus 02:41, 26 March 2009 (UTC)

User talk:Badagnani: Difference between revisions Add topic